.png)
All BNC posts, in chronological order. Hyperlinked Title DATE AUTHOR 2008 Welcome to A Brave New Climate 6/08/2008 Barry Brook Geoengineering – damned if you do, damned if you don’t? 7/08/2008 Barry Brook Climate Change Q&A Seminar 1: Is the Earth Warming (Discussion Thread) 8/08/2008 Barry Brook How long will Old King Coal reign? Part […]
Updated top 10 posts on BNC and some site stats
Posted on 7 June 2010 by Barry Brook |
This is an update to alert readers that I’ve updated and expanded the ‘Top 10′ list of posts on BNC. Below are the listings, broken down by category. But before that, here are some general site statistics that regular readers might find interesting: ‘Birthday‘: 7 August 2008 (with Welcome to a Brave New Climate) Total […]
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tagged: | 41 Comments »
Monckton vs Brook debate – the video
Posted on 8 February 2010 by Barry Brook |
I’m in Melbourne today with Tom Blees, and tomorrow we’re heading to Sydney to visit ANSTO. Whilst there, Tom will give a talk; I’m delighted to see that some of the regular commenters on BNC will be there (look forward to meeting you John D. Morgan, Ewen Laver and perhaps some others). Details here. Whilst […]
Filed under: Nuclear, Sceptics | Tagged: | 91 Comments »
Real holes in science
Posted on 22 January 2010 by Barry Brook |
I’m sometimes asked to describe what science is. Well, there are many definitions and philosophical positions which cover this question, but to me, as a working scientist, one stands out above all others as relevant to what I do. Science constrains uncertainty. Or, to put it in a slightly longer form, science is the method […]
Filed under: Clim Ch Q&A, Impacts | Tagged: | 67 Comments »
Mind the gap – distant climates and immediate budgets
Posted on 10 December 2009 by Barry Brook |
Time for some updates from the world of climate science. First up, the December issue of Nature Reports Climate Change is definitely worth checking out. (This spin-off internet magazine, produced by the Nature Publishing House, is always worth reading, and you can download a full-colour PDF if you prefer this format — good for printing). Three […]
Filed under: Emissions, Future, Hot News | Tagged: | 21 Comments »
Radiation – facts, fallacies and phobias
Posted on 19 September 2009 by Barry Brook |
I note a recent article in Opinion Online by Dr Helen Caldicott was linked to in the Is Our Future Nuclear? comments thread, and this subsequently generated a fair amount of heated discussion. The focal claim from Caldicott in this piece is that it is dangerous to live near to nuclear power plants (NPP), because […]
Filed under: Nuclear | Tagged: | 384 Comments »
Twitter Plimer on ice
Posted on 31 July 2009 by Barry Brook |
Okay, so the title of this blog post is rather cryptic, but that’s because I want to quickly talk about three different things. Twittering BNC. Brook v Plimer report back. And the famous disappearing Arctic sea ice. First then, BraveNewClimate is now producing tweets. You can start following here: http://twitter.com/BraveNewClimate. I’ve also fed the latest […]
Filed under: Impacts, podcast, Sceptics | Tagged: | 16 Comments »
The great climate debate 2009 – Brook vs Plimer
Posted on 27 July 2009 by Barry Brook |
A quick post to let you know that I’ll be ‘debating’ Ian Plimer of Heaven & Earth ‘fame’, tomorrow, in North Adelaide. The event is hosted by ‘Engineers without Borders‘. Details below: ——————————- Climate change debate! Barry Brook will be going head to head with Ian Plimer on the topic “Climate change is man made”. […]
Filed under: Sceptics | Tagged: | 49 Comments »
More ice, flat temperatures – what does it all mean?
Posted on 27 April 2009 by Barry Brook |
Simple messages, which make headlines and create doubt amongst the laity, are an easy sell in the pseudo-sceptical world of climate science contrarianism. Many sound (kind of) plausible, and so gain an undue amount of traction among the general public and non-science decision-makers. Ian Plimer’s recent book capitalises on these themes to full advantage, and, […]
Filed under: Clim Ch Q&A, Sceptics | Tagged: | 79 Comments »
Ian Plimer – Heaven and Earth
Posted on 23 April 2009 by Barry Brook |
Update: Prof Ian Enting from University of Melbourne has provided a detailed, point-by-point critique of Heaven and Earth. You can download the 46-page PDF here (version 2.0). Edit: The Australian newspaper has published an article on Brook vs Plimer (see here). Today I attended the formal launch of Professor Ian Plimer’s new book “Heaven and […]
Filed under: Sceptics | Tagged: | 1,050 Comments »
The war against science while Rome is burning
Posted on 16 April 2009 by Barry Brook |
Guest post by Andrew Glikson (Andrew is an Earth and paleo-climate scientist, Australian National University who has contributed regularly to Brave New Climate). The state of the terrestrial atmosphere over the last ~10,000 years (Holocene), when conditions became amenable for agriculture and civilization, and over the preceding ~5 million years (Pliocene-Pleistocene) when prehistoric humans evolved, was constrained by a CO2 range […]
Filed under: Clim Ch Q&A | Tagged: | 30 Comments »
Top 10
These are the top 10 most viewed posts on BraveNewClimate – happy reading (hits and # comments, in brackets): —————————————————- Top 10 climate sceptics posts 1. Ian Plimer – Heaven and Earth (45,780; 1,028) 2. Spot the recycled denial III – Prof Ian Plimer (7,509; 40) 3. Sceptics (6,709; 15) 4. Dr David Evans: born-again ‘alarmist’? […]
The Solar Fraud
Posted on 18 March 2009 by Barry Brook |
The Oxford English Dictionary defines ‘fraud’ as the wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain, or a person intending or thing intended to deceive. Okay. So how could this word possibly be connected with ‘solar‘, an adjective relating to or determined by the sun or its rays? Howard Hayden, in his controversial […]
Filed under: Nuclear, Renewables | Tagged: | 90 Comments »
Two denialist talking points quashed
Posted on 14 October 2008 by Barry Brook |
Two things that Professor Ian Plimer confidently touted during his presentation at the SA Skeptics annual conference was (1) the relevance of David Evan’s so-called missing tropical hotspot (as supposed proof against greenhouse theory) and (2) that sub-sea volcanoes along the Gakkel Ridge is likely to be the cause of accelerated melting of the Arctic summer […]
Filed under: Sceptics | Tagged: | 19 Comments »
Sceptics
In this series, I aim to teach you to recognise the recycled denialism that is rife in the public arena these days. I don’t refute this nonsense by constructing a new argument each time which, point-by-point, shows why their claims are not supported by the evidence. This is pointless, since the majority of non-greenhouse theorists (‘pseudo-sceptics’) blithely […]
Spot the recycled denial V – Prof Bob Carter
Posted on 12 September 2008 by Barry Brook |
In this series, I aim to teach you to recognise the recycled denialism that is rife in the public arena these days. I don’t refute this nonsense by constructing a new argument each time which, point-by-point, shows why their claims are not supported by the evidence. This is pointless, since the majority of non-greenhouse theorists […]
Filed under: Sceptics | Tagged: | 30 Comments »
Spot the recycled denial IV – climate case built on thin foundation
Posted on 9 September 2008 by Barry Brook |
In this series, I aim to teach you to recognise the recycled denialism that is rife in the public arena these days. I don’t refute this nonsense by constructing a new argument each time which, point-by-point, shows why their claims are not supported by the evidence. This is pointless, since the majority of non-greenhouse theorists […]
Filed under: Sceptics | Tagged: | 45 Comments »
Spot the recycled denial III – Prof Ian Plimer
Posted on 1 September 2008 by Barry Brook |
Update: Review of Plimer’s book “Heaven and Earth” is here: http://bravenewclimate.com/2009/04/23/ian-plimer-heaven-and-earth/ ——————————————- In this series, I aim to teach you to recognise the recycled denialism that is rife in the public arena these days. I don’t refute this nonsense by constructing a new argument each time which, point-by-point, shows why their claims are not supported […]
Filed under: Sceptics | Tagged: | 43 Comments »
